home | what's new | other sites | contact | about

Word Gems 

exploring self-realization, sacred personhood, and full humanity

return to the main-page article on "God"

WPB: I have a Bible question. In the Exodus account of Moses encountering the burning bush, it seems to indicate that not the voice of God but “the angel of the Lord” was interacting with him. Could you check various Bible commentaries online to get a sense of what is going on here with “the angel”?

ChatGPT: Great question — this exact phrasing in Exodus 3:1–6 has puzzled readers and commentators for centuries.

Let’s look at what a range of Bible commentaries and scholars say about why the text refers first to “the angel of the LORD” appearing to Moses and then immediately depicts God (YHWH) speaking directly from the bush. Bible Hub+3Bible Hub+3Christianity.com+3

What the Text Says (Overview)

• Exodus 3:2: The angel of the LORD appears to Moses in a flame from the burning bush.

• Exodus 3:4–6: The narrative then switches to YHWH (God) calling to Moses from the bush and identifying Himself as the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.

This raises the question: Is “the angel of the LORD” a created angel? Or is it referring to God Himself? Bible Hub

Major Interpretive Traditions

1. Theophany — A Manifestation of God Himself

Many commentators see “the angel of the LORD” in this passage as not a created angelic being, but rather a visible manifestation of God’s presence (a theophany).

• Bible study notes and many traditional interpretations say that the Angel of the LORD in several Old Testament passages represents God Himself appearing to humans. Bible Hub

• This interpretation is supported by the fact that in the very next verses, the voice speaking from the bush identifies itself as YHWH, the covenant God of the patriarchs. Bible Hub

This view holds that the narrative begins with a title angel of the LORD (literally mal ak YHWH, “messenger of YHWH”) but then the text reveals that this messenger is God in His self-revelation to Moses.

2. “Angel of the LORD” as God’s Representative

Some commentators (especially classical Protestant and older commentaries like Wesley’s and Matthew Henry’s) take a slightly different angle:

• The angel is a divine representative or messenger, but the encounter itself is an extraordinary divine appearance — God’s glory made visible. Christianity.com+1

• In this view, the “angel” is the agent through whom God reveals Himself, but the words Moses hears are directly God’s voice. It’s not a mere ordinary angel (who would never say “I am the LORD”). Christianity.com

So some see the angel as conveying God’s presence, like a herald, but the ultimate speaker is YHWH.

3. Pre-incarnate Christ (in Christian Tradition)

Many Christian theologians (especially in historical and Reformed traditions) interpret the angel of the LORD as a pre-incarnate appearance of the Second Person of the Trinity (what later Christians understand as Christ before the incarnation).

• Commentaries like Ellicott’s and Benson’s explicitly identify this Angel with the Second Person of the Trinity because he speaks as God and not merely for God. Bible Hub

• This interpretation highlights that the Angel bears the name of God, speaks in divine first-person, and is not differentiated from YHWH in the narrative context. Pentecostal Theology

In this view, this appearance (and others like it in the Old Testament) anticipates the fuller revelation of God in Jesus Christ.

Why the Narrative Uses Both Terms

Here are some ways scholars and commentators explain the shift:

Title vs. Identity

• The term “angel of the LORD” may function as a title or role (God’s messenger) but not necessarily a separate created being. Bible Hub

• Once Moses turns aside to look, God (YHWH) speaks directly, showing that the angel and the LORD are not two separate speakers in this narrative. Christianity.com

Literary/Theological Emphasis

• The narrative shows God revealing Himself progressively: first in a visible form (angel) that captures attention, then in His personal name YHWH. This builds anticipation and emphasizes God’s holy presence. Christianity.com

Old Testament Usage Patterns

• Elsewhere in Scripture, “the angel of the LORD” appears with divine authority and identity (e.g., with Hagar, Abraham at Mamre, Gideon), sometimes indistinguishable from God. Bible Hub

Here’s a snapshot of how major commentaries handle the phrase:

Wrap-Up Thought

The phrase “the angel of the LORD” in Exodus 3 functions as a bridge between the invisible God and visible encounter. In many ancient and theological readings, the angel isn’t merely a created angel; rather, this figure embodies God’s immediate presence, preparing Moses for the direct revelation of YHWH’s covenant name.

WPB: So, in your summary view, the term “angel” is not a reference to the traditional concept of “one of God’s messengers or servants” but instead refers to a stepped-down version of God’s glory, needful when communicating with frail humans, and in this sense becomes a “messenger” or “interpretation” of the Divine. This could be a coherent explanation of the text.

ChatGPT: Yes — that is a coherent, historically grounded, and textually sensitive way of reading Exodus 3, and it aligns closely with how many serious interpreters have understood the passage, even if they phrase it differently.

Let me restate your view in slightly more technical biblical language and then show why it fits the text well.

1. “Angel” as Mode of Manifestation, not a Separate Being

You’re essentially saying that:

• “Angel” (Hebrew mal ak) describes a function — “one who mediates, conveys, or interprets” — not necessarily a created celestial being.

• In Exodus 3, the term marks a mediated form of divine presence, not a different speaker from YHWH.

• This mediation is necessary because unmediated divine glory would overwhelm a human (cf. “no one can see me and live”).

This is not a modern invention. It reflects a long-standing theological instinct: God adapts His self-revelation to human capacity.

2. Why the Text Itself Supports This

A. The Immediate Narrative Shift

The passage does not treat the angel and YHWH as two actors:

• v.2 — “The angel of the LORD appeared to him…”

• v.4 — “When the LORD saw that he turned aside… God called to him…”

• v.6 — “I am the God of your father…”

There is:

• No handoff

• No clarification

• No distinction in voice or authority

That only makes sense if “angel” describes how God appears, not who is speaking.

B. “Messenger” Language Fits Divine Self-Interpretation

In the ancient Near Eastern and biblical world:

• A messenger was not merely a courier.

• The messenger embodied the authority and presence of the sender.

• Often the messenger spoke in the first person of the one who sent him.

In this case, God is not sending a message about Himself —
He is interpreting Himself into a form Moses can encounter.

Your phrase “interpretation of the Divine” is especially apt.

3. “Stepped-Down Glory” Is a Classic Biblical Idea

While Scripture doesn’t use that phrase, the concept is everywhere:

• Moses cannot see God’s face (Exod 33)

• God appears in cloud, fire, storm, or voice — never naked essence

• Isaiah sees “the hem of His robe” filling the temple

• Ezekiel piles metaphor upon metaphor to avoid direct depiction

The burning bush fits this pattern perfectly:

• God is fully present

• God is not fully unveiled

Calling this manifestation “the angel of YHWH” signals:

This is truly God — but God in a form fitted to human encounter.

4. Why “Angel” Is the Right Word (and Not a Problem)

If mal ak means “one who makes known,” then:

• God appearing as mal ak YHWH is God making Himself known without annihilating the hearer

• The term safeguards both transcendence and immanence

• It avoids saying God is spatially localized or physically contained

So yes — “angel” here does not mean:

“one of God’s servants”

It means:

God in His self-communicating, self-mediating mode

5. How This View Bridges Jewish and Christian Readings

What’s notable is that your formulation:

• Fits Jewish interpretive instincts (divine mediation without dividing God)

• Fits Christian theology (especially Logos / Word theology)

• Avoids crude literalism on one side

• Avoids flattening the text on the other

That’s why it has endured.

6. A Precise Way to Say It

If you wanted to state this view very carefully, you might say:

In Exodus 3, “the angel of the LORD” designates not a created intermediary but the form in which the LORD’s presence becomes encounterable — a mediated manifestation of divine glory that both reveals and conceals, allowing finite humans to receive the divine word without being overwhelmed.

That is a textually responsible reading.

WPB: Please give the verse for "no one can see God and live."

ChatGPT: The wording comes most directly from Exodus 33:20.

“But,” he said, “you cannot see my face, for no one may see me and live.”
— Exodus 33:20 (NIV; similar in ESV, NRSV, KJV)

This is God speaking to Moses after the golden calf incident, when Moses asks, “Show me your glory.”

Related and Supporting Passages

While Exodus 33:20 is the clearest statement, the same idea appears elsewhere in Scripture:

Judges 13:22

Manoah, after encountering the angel of the LORD:

“We are doomed to die! We have seen God!”

This reflects the belief that seeing God directly results in death.

Genesis 32:30

Jacob after wrestling at Peniel:

“I have seen God face to face, and yet my life was spared.”

The surprise here only makes sense if the expectation was death.

Deuteronomy 5:24–26

Israel after hearing God’s voice:

“For what mortal has ever heard the voice of the living God speaking out of fire, as we have, and lived?”

Again, survival is treated as extraordinary.

1 Kings 19:11–13

Elijah encounters God not in wind, earthquake, or fire, but in a “thin silence,” and covers his face, indicating the same reverence and danger.

New Testament Echoes

The idea carries forward:

• John 1:18

  “No one has ever seen God; the only Son… has made him known.”

• 1 Timothy 6:16

  God “dwells in unapproachable light, whom no one has ever seen or can see.”

How This Relates to Your Earlier Question

This principle explains why divine encounters are mediated:

• God appears in fire, cloud, angelic form, or voice

• Humans encounter God truly, but not unfiltered

• Hence the need for what you aptly called a “stepped-down” manifestation

So when Exodus 3 says Moses encounters “the angel of the LORD” and yet hears God Himself, Exodus 33:20 supplies the theological logic behind that narrative choice.

postscript

The concept of “the angel of the Lord” serves as disturbing footnote to my life.

More than 50 years ago, at Bible college, Old Testament Survey class, the instructor referenced the burning bush incident. He was making dogmatic statements concerning “God spoke to Moses” and the like.

I raised my hand to ask a question, if God spoke to Moses why does the text say that “the angel of the Lord” interacted with him?

The instructor’s response was astonishing to me. He took my question as a challenge to his authority, his position that God spoke directly to Moses. Instead of attempting to answer the question, he held me up for ridicule to the class.

Those were my days in cult religion. I should have walked out, right then and there, and left the college. But I was not yet strong enough within myself to trust myself in these matters. Another nearly-25 years would pass before I could separate myself from this sewer pit.

This instructor became my permanent enemy. I well recall a moment of his rage: I was working on the student janitorial crew, as it happened, just outside his office in the admin building. A buddy and I were discussing the Bible as we worked. The instructor, again, so threatened by me, came out of his office to condemn me for “preaching” and what right did I have to voice any opinion? This incident seems more than shocking to me today: there I was, a seminary student, but forbidden to speak about the Bible in casual conversation to a friend.

But he wasn’t done. A few years later, at graduation, I was being interviewed for a possible ministerial trainee position by a group of elders. None of them knew me personally, except for one – my favorite nemesis, the instructor. He went out of his way to “poison the well” concerning my reputation, and he was successful, the elders did not hire me. Of course, looking back on it now, I dodged a bullet as, had I been hired, it wouldn’t have been long before my personal research of the Bible would have caused the hierarchy to brand me as “disloyal” and “not a team player.”

the larger issue of ‘the angel of the Lord’

While I have come to see that the Bible is not an infallible text, it does contain certain wisdom. The general principle of “stepping down” the glory of God is found everywhere in the afterlife research literature.

We are taught, personally tutored by God, in small "flashes" and "sparks" of insight. Why the diminution? It’s because it’s all we can take, the universe is most gracious and will not rush into the full blaze of glory before we’re ready - which could take quite a while. The diminutive scale of early enlightenment is not a defect — it’s a mercy.

Further, it’s well established – that is, among authentic spirit guides -- that the best teachers, especially when they deal with new arrivals, will do nothing to amaze or bedazzle, to attract attention to themselves, even to the extent of changing the color of their garments to something drab-looking, so intent are they to avoid any action that might disturb or confuse the immature.

And concerning NDE accounts – many of these reporters are convinced that they personally spoke to God, and even met God, over there. This is not possible. What they encountered was an “angel of the Lord,” some low-wattage representation of the divine, likely, some spirit guide talking to them.

How do we know this? – “no one can see God and live” – the voltage would destroy us. And I suspect that, for this reason, we will never, even a million years from now, see the actual face of, or a direct encounter with, God .